CEO’s and government may work together in ways that show corruption, but they are not the same thing. A CEO works for a business so the government does not control their pay or any of their actions as long as they obey the law. The government certainly should not be responsible for firing CEO’s corrupt or not, that is the decision of a business. The government is responsible for making sure CEO’s pay their taxes and do obey the law. That they are not doing so is what needs to change. At the same time government is in no way responsible for the survival of a business. When corrupt CEO’s or other problems lead a business to fail, they need to be able to fail. Eventually companies could not survive with CEO’s siphoning off so much money, but the government steps in and gives them tax breaks and or bail outs. Although people have come to depend on services from certain huge businesses, these businesses need to be held to the same standards as other businesses. The government certainly would not bail out your town bank, so they should not bail out a giant bank. This only sets a standard that large enough corporations can use the government to support them when they fail, so it does not matter if they start to fail. Failure means government funds. This is like rewarding someone for bad behavior. The behavior will only continue. I do not think the government should help or hinder businesses, but if they do buy out businesses then the business has to become theirs to control. If they buy businesses out, they gain the right to fire CEO’s but they should not be buying them out in the first place. For capitalism to stay a viable system, corporations need to be responsible for their own survival or failure.
Do you think the government should buy out failing businesses and if so what is their responsibility level for the business once they have bought it?
No comments:
Post a Comment